For me, there are at least two challenges. The first is, as some of you have already posted, to not let the bad guys make me change who I am. I won't let their evil doings stop me from being true to my heart - I'll continue to be compassionate, and open, and caring, etc.

But the other challenege is much harder. I don't want to live in fear, hiding, terrified, because of their evil deeds. However I also don't want to be a risk taker just to prove that I'm not afraid.

I suppose part of what that means for me is I won't be traveling or hanging out in any major cities for awhile. Yes, I know terrorists can strike any where any time. I guess I just want to minimize my exposure to risk.

I just don't know But I don't have any false bravado, and I can't deny my fears.

Jacqueline, but you need to put the risk into perspective. I think it's very sad that you will change how you would want to move around because acts of terrorism continue.

In Scotland...
In 1996 18 people lost their lives and 15 were injured in the Dunblane school massacre, a 46 year old man was behind the shootings.

In 2005 55 people lost their lives and around 700 people were injured in the co-ordinated suicide bombings in London.

In 2014 the driver of a Glasgow Council (where I live) bin lorry became unwell at the wheel of the vehicle and lost control. 6 people died, 15 were injured and countless individuals witnessed a horrific incident days before christmas day. I had passed through the area where this incident happened a short time before.

In 2014 the UK's figures for death caused by a road traffic accident sat at about 1,775.

I have a morbid acceptance that tomorrow the actions of another person or a series of unfortunate events could lead to a serious injury or death. I live in the heart of Scotland in a major city beside a major international airport.

At the end of the week I'll be travelling by air to London and it's likely I'll also be asked through my work to journey to London, New York and Columbus next year.

If we consider that previous acts of terrorism have involved planes (gulp) and major cities (double, triple, quadruple gulp) then I am doing a great job at increasing my exposure to risk. But given that I also visit schools, cross roads, eat chocolate, take sugar in my tea, boulder, horse ride and cycle on the road it would seem a huge, huge shame for me to give up all of these hobbies and passions to avoid death, fear or injury. To give it up all because of a 'what if' that might never happen.

Every time I've been assaulted I have been somewhere I should have been 'safe' and I have not been on my own.

I hope that I'll die surrounded by loved ones in a comfortable room full of sweet smelling flowers. But in the absence of control, I might as well have a blast and do what makes me happy... like scratching the god forsaken rash.

Sorry if my post was misunderstood as calling for fear or prejudice. That’s not how I feel or what I intended to convey as a message.

My observation and comment was a condensed version of; whatever you want to call this movement that wishes to destroy all who don't believe in their fanatical and depraved interpretation of a religion, is gaining momentum. I'm afraid some of the leaders we look to for ensuring our security and leadership do not fully understand what this is and are also underestimating it. They are reacting in absolute predictable patterns.

That doesn't mean I feel individuals need wholesale changes in the way they live their lives but since the topic of fear has been been brought up, being vigilante of personal security now more than ever, I believe, would be wise – don’t be fearful but be alert, have some plans.

We need to call on those we've elected as our leaders to have a greater sense of urgency. I thought the response for this latest attack by the man i voted for president was pathetic.

There is a vacuum of leadership from the top down in his administration which is extremely dangerous at a time a very well-funded group (topic for another thread I think) has made it a priority to obtain, and use weapons of mass destruction. You would be hard pressed to find any capable informed analyst in the global security industry that does not believe this to be a when, where, and how bad will it be scenario.

I don't watch the news, but my parents watch the Fox "News" channel (which is awful), so I heard something about requiring a religious test for refugees to make sure they are all Christian. WHAT?! So no Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, etc. allowed, huh? This is sounding an awful lot like the Nazis, just saying.

Cyborg - "This is sounding an awful lot like the Nazis...", except it's not because that isn't what's happening. Refugees are screened before being admitted to check that they are not known to be affiliated with a terrorist group, they are not rejected based on religion.

I was talking about what Republicans WANT to happen (screening people to make sure they are Christians). Because Republicans believe America is a "Christian country" (that means there should only be Christians living here).

Syrians who are not interested in participating in war are being brutalized in the most horrid ways. They must be able to leave Syria. Other countries must be willing to take them in. We cannot stand by and allow genocide, ever.

However, they are fleeing a country deep in civil war, there is no way to quickly and accurately check backgrounds to ensure they are who they say they are. The only humane and logical thing is for the global community to build places for them to live that are humane. These places must be maintained, hygienic and provide high quality medical care and education while the resources which do exist, but take some time are implemented to sort out who is who. All countries should then be granting asylum based on ability to support new immigrants.

It cannot be based on political rhetoric, bias or hate. The vast majorities of these people are good and decent and have been through enough already. It is time for the gloabl community to put their resources into peace. We are only escalating and going deeper into a wold war scenario.

Thanks GPIG. I have been kind of agonizing about the whole refugee thing. Back and forth between wanting to help those fleeing for their lives, and at the same time protect us from those trying to get an easy into our country to destroy us.

I agree with you that setting up a temporary place - safe, clean, etc - for people to stay while the global community finds an expedited way to sort out who's who makes the most sense.

Sadly, I'm reluctant to say even that much. I feel very jaded I guess. I'm so convinced that we only get the tiniest bit of the actual information. It's so hard to form any opinion, or engage in any reasonable discussion when you don't have the necessary info.